This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
sched: Fix unreliable rseq cpu_id for new tasks
to the 5.7-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
sched-fix-unreliable-rseq-cpu_id-for-new-tasks.patch
and it can be found in the queue-5.7 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it.
>From ce3614daabea8a2d01c1dd17ae41d1ec5e5ae7db Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2020 16:49:10 -0400
Subject: sched: Fix unreliable rseq cpu_id for new tasks
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
commit ce3614daabea8a2d01c1dd17ae41d1ec5e5ae7db upstream.
While integrating rseq into glibc and replacing glibc's sched_getcpu
implementation with rseq, glibc's tests discovered an issue with
incorrect __rseq_abi.cpu_id field value right after the first time
a newly created process issues sched_setaffinity.
For the records, it triggers after building glibc and running tests, and
then issuing:
for x in {1..2000} ; do posix/tst-affinity-static & done
and shows up as:
error: Unexpected CPU 2, expected 0
error: Unexpected CPU 2, expected 0
error: Unexpected CPU 2, expected 0
error: Unexpected CPU 2, expected 0
error: Unexpected CPU 138, expected 0
error: Unexpected CPU 138, expected 0
error: Unexpected CPU 138, expected 0
error: Unexpected CPU 138, expected 0
This is caused by the scheduler invoking __set_task_cpu() directly from
sched_fork() and wake_up_new_task(), thus bypassing rseq_migrate() which
is done by set_task_cpu().
Add the missing rseq_migrate() to both functions. The only other direct
use of __set_task_cpu() is done by init_idle(), which does not involve a
user-space task.
Based on my testing with the glibc test-case, just adding rseq_migrate()
to wake_up_new_task() is sufficient to fix the observed issue. Also add
it to sched_fork() to keep things consistent.
The reason why this never triggered so far with the rseq/basic_test
selftest is unclear.
The current use of sched_getcpu(3) does not typically require it to be
always accurate. However, use of the __rseq_abi.cpu_id field within rseq
critical sections requires it to be accurate. If it is not accurate, it
can cause corruption in the per-cpu data targeted by rseq critical
sections in user-space.
Reported-By: Florian Weimer <fweimer@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Tested-By: Florian Weimer <fweimer@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # v4.18+
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200707201505.2632-1-mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/sched/core.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -2876,6 +2876,7 @@ int sched_fork(unsigned long clone_flags
* Silence PROVE_RCU.
*/
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&p->pi_lock, flags);
+ rseq_migrate(p);
/*
* We're setting the CPU for the first time, we don't migrate,
* so use __set_task_cpu().
@@ -2940,6 +2941,7 @@ void wake_up_new_task(struct task_struct
* as we're not fully set-up yet.
*/
p->recent_used_cpu = task_cpu(p);
+ rseq_migrate(p);
__set_task_cpu(p, select_task_rq(p, task_cpu(p), SD_BALANCE_FORK, 0));
#endif
rq = __task_rq_lock(p, &rf);
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx are
queue-5.7/tcp-md5-do-not-send-silly-options-in-syncookies.patch
queue-5.7/sched-fix-unreliable-rseq-cpu_id-for-new-tasks.patch
queue-5.7/tcp-md5-add-missing-memory-barriers-in-tcp_md5_do_add-tcp_md5_hash_key.patch
queue-5.7/tcp-md5-allow-changing-md5-keys-in-all-socket-states.patch
queue-5.7/tcp-md5-refine-tcp_md5_do_add-tcp_md5_hash_key-barriers.patch
